Abstract

Many scholars in computing and information systems have sufficient experience to notice that, sometimes, when the word “innovation” begins to appear the reality generally involves a new “feature” looking for an... [ view full abstract ]

Many scholars in computing and information systems have sufficient experience to notice that, sometimes, when the word “innovation” begins to appear the reality generally involves a new “feature” looking for an “application”. This is not saying that this phenomenon is necessarily bad, but if there are important assumptions involved in the development of the “feature” and the race for “innovation” involves overlooking these assumptions, the result might necessarily be unfortunate. One of our favorite examples of this is when a hospital gift shop eliminated its cashbox and installed a Point of Sale terminal connected online to the hospital’s accounting system. The gift shop had been staffed by volunteers who subsequently quit because they could not adjust to the new system. As a result, the hospital had to hire staff. The hospital incurred more expense and had generated poor will among the volunteers.

Given that this phenomenon is known, does it apply to Precision Learning? In fact, Precision Learning has attracted attention and support, while at the same time failing to be specific about what it is. Ideas like competency based learning, proceeding through learning materials at a faster or slower pace, and different paths through curriculum are mentioned for students. Yet, the focus is often on the Learning Management Systems (LMS), or blended learning platforms and little attention is paid to student information systems. In effect, if there are to be multiple paths thru a curriculum, how is that represented on the transcripts produced by the student information system? Of course, there is an “innovation” in the application of Watson that might be a contributor to the interest in Precision Learning. (Note: while applying IBM’s artificial intelligence Watson to the development and application of a dynamic curriculum is very attractive – does it follow that this would necessarily be Precision Learning?)

For our colleagues that develop their own courses in their Learning Management Systems, we think it is likely that they may have noticed how easy it would be to implement a Programmed Learning approach, especially a linear version. Additionally, simply adding some control statements (if, do, while, etc.) would produce a close approximation of the benefits for students suggested by Precision Learning. Thus, the focus of this work is to consider Programmed Learning and Precision Learning and illustrate how they are similar and how they differ.

The history of the concepts “Precision Learning” and “Programmed Learning” will be traced as they appear in scholarly publications. This result will show where there is scholarship in common and where there is divergence. Additionally, the simpler concept of dynamic curriculum will be investigated. The intended result is to provide more information about the effects we might experience from forthcoming innovations in teaching and learning.

This paper will be of interest to any faculty who work with online programs or whose classes are supported by Learning Management Systems (LMS). It may also be relevant for administrators and staff. This work could also be of interest to a variety of vendors.